Religion and Civil Law, Howard Gregory, Jamaica Observer, November 29, 2009

Religion and Civil Law

By Howard Gregory
Jamaica Observer
November 29, 2009

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/html/20091128T200000-0500_164729_OBS_RELIGION_AND_CIVIL_LAW_.asp

HOWARD GREGORY

A recent lead story in one of our daily newspapers reported on a confrontation between the Roman Catholic Church and the State over matters of law, and was subtitled "Catholic priests, State clash over reporting of confessed crimes". The article quotes Monsignor Kenneth Richards, rector of the Roman Catholic Cathedral. It is suggested that the rules of the Church, known as Canon Law, do not allow for the disclosure of information shared in the confessional, even if this relates to the abuse of a child. He is further quoted as stating that the seal of the confessional stands supreme and cannot be superseded by any civil law.

While this disclosure by Monsignor Richards is bound to create a lot of stir and ruffle many feathers, based on the sensational way in which the article was written, he has certainly rendered a service to the wider society by opening up the discussion on religion, which up to this point was on a very superficial level and without any form of analysis. Certainly, there are those who, under the influence of secularism and modernity, want to advance the position that religion needs to be marginalised as a relic of superstition, ignorance, and of an age that is past, notwithstanding the fact that credible research lends no credence to such assertions. That the BBC could, in recent weeks, have had a debate as to whether the Roman Catholic Church has been a force for good in the world, and got diverse responses, is indicative, at least in part, of the negative view which some have of religion.

There has also been a united response in countries which have been identified in the past as part of Christendom to the passage of laws that seek to limit the role of religion in the public sphere and in the life of the nation. They even prescribe how to deal with issues which have been traditionally defined as matters of doctrine and practice within the life of the Church. One example of this is the way in which the issue of human sexuality is being legislated by governments. There is a move afoot in the United Kingdom to make it illegal for the Church to preach that homosexuality is wrong, by making the issue one of human rights, with the consequence for violation being prosecution. In some countries, same-sex unions have now been defined as marriage. This is true in Holland and South Africa, to name a few. In Holland where the clergy are paid by the state, those who refuse to carry out such marriages face a real problem. In South Africa, I am told, the law specifically exempts the Church from any compulsion to perform such marriages.

The issue of marriage brings me to the substance of Monsignor's statement on the Roman Catholic Church. For the Roman Catholic Church, and some other Christian traditions including my own, marriage as well as the confessional (spoken of today as the Sacrament of Reconciliation) are sacraments of the Church. Sacraments belong to the Church and are neither the right/entitlement of anyone nor come under the sphere of jurisdiction of the State. While Monsignor Richards was not providing the media with a lesson in catechesis, it would be good to understand what a sacrament is. "The sacraments are outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace, given by Christ as sure and certain means by which we receive that grace." In its simplest expression one can state that the confessional to which the Monsignor refers becomes the place and opportunity for one who has done wrong and is troubled to come in penitence and acknowledge openly, in a confidential relationship, the wrong that has been done and to seek to receive the grace of forgiveness and make reparation.

This is the point that is missed by many whose traditions do not include this sacrament as part of their discipline. The article misses this point altogether. The confessional is not an 'information bank' where persons come to deposit with the priest all the evils of his or her life. Rather it is the place where the penitents come to unburden themselves by acknowledging guilt and seek, through the grace imparted and affirmed, the strength to go and do the right and to make amends where necessary.

To paint a clearer, if not a bit offensive picture, the person coming to confess that he or she has, for example, committed a murder would not be advised by the priest to make sure that the body is properly hidden or buried, but would seek to explore the extent to which the person sees his or her actions as immoral, is disturbed of conscience, and would want to do what is necessary to relieve a troubled conscience and to be right with God. As the Monsignor indicated, this could mean that one seeks to have a long-term relationship with the penitent so that matters related to the consequences of his or her actions may be explored and be addressed. This could lead to a situation in which the priest becomes involved in the situation to the extent that he may be the one to accompany the penitent to the police by mutual consent.

While not directly related to the confessional, I found myself in a situation in recent times in which, while conducting a public service in church, a man came forward to the sanctuary and requested that the assisting parish priest accompany him to the police station because he had just stabbed a woman and she may have died. Put in the simplest form, one could say that the disturbance of conscience from his actions, and acknowledgement of the crime he committed, led him to seek out the religious figure with whom he could share that burden, even in a public setting.

What is probably most troubling for many, in the remarks of the Monsignor, is his comment that although the civil law mandates that everyone should report cases of child abuse, the priest is not bound to give such information shared under the seal of the confessional, neither can the civil law enforce such compliance, as it is contrary to the Canon Law. Most non-Roman Catholics have no idea what Canon Laws are and the force of these for the clergy and the faithful alike. That does not negate the effect of the same. The Roman Catholic tradition is not the only one that understands the seal of the confessional in this way, but the Roman Catholic tradition has the force of Canon Law and the institution of the Vatican behind it. I would suggest that the persons who see a clash happening between the State and the Roman Catholic Church may not want to get into a provocative position or showdown with the Vatican on the place of the confessional in relation to civil law.

What I think would have proved useful is if the Monsignor had talked about the place of "diminished responsibility" in the handling of the confessional and confidentiality. For example, if a minor comes to the confessional and says, "Bless me, Father, for I am about to run away from home", the priest would not simply respond by saying, "Take care, you walk on the sidewalk and be careful of the traffic." Neither would the person who says that 'voices' are telling him that he is to go next door to the school and kill six children because they are possessed by the devil be told to make sure he kills only six and no more.

The point is, there are situations of "diminished responsibility" in which minors are at risk, persons are planning to commit a homicide or suicide, persons are mentally ill, or under the influence of some mind-altering drugs, and who may require intervention to save the life of the penitent or the person/s he or she is about to harm.

What should have been forthcoming in the Monsignor's comments is that the minor who is subject to continuous abuse and dangerous situations would be a consideration in terms of diminished responsibility and would be subject to special concerns, and as such may also receive exceptional consideration under the seal of the confessional. Additionally, the confessional is not being advocated for use as a shelter for the child abuser, but rather is a place where the abuser may come in penitence, acknowledge the wrong that has been done, and seek to do what is necessary to make amends and to change his or her ways. Certainly, this must be the concern for all abusers whether they make use of the confessional or not.